On Monday night at the Olympics, a soccer game, more than worthy of the hallowed ground it was played on, got the ending it so deserved. That doesn’t happen often in sports, especially in soccer, where penalty kicks so frequently settle fierce battles. This one got a buzzer shot. Old Trafford stadium, home to one of the most storied franchises in sports — Manchester United — hasn’t seen much better.

In the final minute of extra time, U.S. forward Alex Morgan leaped over the Canadian defense, headed in a beautiful cross from two-time Olympic gold medalist Heather O’Reilly and gave the U.S. a wild — and wildly exciting — 4-3 victory over Canada in the Olympic semifinals. This one, between two rivals who don’t like one another, was unforgettable: it was maybe the best moment in Olympic soccer history, and arguably the most captivating moment of these Games.

The Olympics now get the dream gold-medal game: U.S. vs. Japan, a rematch of last year’s similarly classic World Cup final, which Japan won on penalty kicks after mounting two late comebacks. “I don’t have much to say,” says U.S. goalie Hope Solo, after it was all over. Before Morgan scored, Solo was checking her footing on the pitch, mentally preparing for penalty kicks. “I have to wrap my head around what just happened.”

In American sports over the past year, has any team provided more drama than the U.S. women’s soccer squad? The U.S. may have lost last year’s World Cup final, but the game was unforgettable. In the quarterfinals last summer, the U.S. tied Brazil on another last-second goal — one by Abby Wambach — and advanced on penalty kicks. In this year’s Olympic opener, the U.S. fell behind to France, 2-0, before rallying to a 4-2 victory.

In the Olympic semifinal in Manchester, the U.S. trailed three different times. “I’m too old for this,” says defender Christie Rampone, 37, referring to the heart-stopping tendencies of her team. Why does this team play so many close games? “I think we’re asking ourselves that question in the locker room,” says forward Lauren Cheney. “Who are we? Why are we doing that?” The team does realize, however, that playing nail-biters has boosted its popularity, even among casual soccer fans. “It’s fun for us as well,” says Megan Rapinoe, who scored two goals against Canada.

From the opening whistle, the game was physical. “A lot of the Canadian players were taking us down, getting a lot of yellow cards,” says Morgan. “And I don’t blame them. I don’t think they were as fit as we were.” Within minutes, star Canada forward Christine Sinclair, who has scored more international goals than any player not named Mia Hamm, shoved an American player right into the ground.

The toughness paid off. Canada struck first, in the 22nd minute, when Sinclair danced around Kelley O’Hara near the goal box, and put her country on the board. Coming into the game, the Americans enjoyed a silly-looking 43-3-5 all-time record against their northern neighbors. Canada hadn’t beaten the U.S. in 26 games, dating back to 2001

Rapinoe, however, responded early in the second half by curling a corner kick around the post, directly into the net. In Beckham’s old home, she bent it. “I wish I could say I was definitely meaning to do that,” Rapinoe says. “A bit of a mistake on my part.” Canada failed to station a defender at the post, a huge fundamental mistake. Rapinoe hadn’t scored directly off a corner kick in ages. “Probably when I was like 12,” she says. “And the corner kick [was] 5 yards from the goal.”

From here, Sinclair’s noggin took over. In the 67th minute, she headed in a cross from Melissa Tancredi to put Canada up 2-1. Just three minutes later, however, Rapinoe scored what she called the goal of her life — a rocket from just inside the 18-yard box that banged off the post, and in. Just three minutes after that goal, Sinclair’s head struck again: this time, she leaped over U.S. defender Rachel Buehler to notch a hat trick and put Canada up by one. That’s three goals in six minutes. Soccer bashers: if you want to see scoring, watch the women.

That had to be the one, right? Canada would pull off the upset — Sinclair was just too good, a Gretzky on grass. The Americans, however, weren’t flustered. “We never think we’re out of it,” says Rapinoe. “We’re kind of like, ‘O.K., that just means we need to score another one.’ Huge heart, huge fight on this team.”

The U.S. kept attacking — and got some huge breaks. In the 80th minute, Canada goalkeeper Erin McLeod was whistled for violating the six-second rule, which mandates that the goalie get rid of the ball after holding it for six ticks. This rule is frequently violated and almost never enforced. “There was a warning from the linesman at the start of the second half,” says McLeod. “She said, ‘Don’t delay the play too much.’ But it wasn’t like a real warning.”

The U.S. players saw things differently. “She was taking a long time on the goal kicks,” says Rapinoe. “Every time she had the ball in her hand, she was holding it for 15 to 20 seconds.” The call gave the U.S. an indirect free kick: Rapinoe whacked the ball toward Canada’s Marie-Eve Nault. It appeared to inadvertently hit her arm in the penalty area. The refs called it a hand ball, giving the U.S. a penalty shot to tie it.

The crowd hissed; afterward, the Canadians were furious. “We were robbed,” says McLeod. Sinclair essentially insisted that the game was fixed. “We feel like we didn’t lose, we feel like it was taken away from us,” she says. “It’s a shame in a game like that, which is so important, that the ref decided the result before the game started.” Sinclair said that after calling the penalty, the ref “actually giggled and said nothing. Classy! … We feel cheated.” She wasn’t done. When asked about the bronze-medal game, against France, Sinclair says: “Maybe the referee will wear a Canadian jersey.”

The Americans hit back. “You can’t blame the referee,” says Wambach. “We feel good about the way we won tonight.” Sinclair may have scored three goals, but Solo didn’t offer overwhelming respect. “We made her look good,” says Solo.

On the controversial penalty kick, McLeod guessed that Wambach would shoot it to her right: she bet correctly, but Wambach still kicked it past her, off the post and in. Again, tie game. In extra time, both teams continued to pummel each other. O’Reilly, who entered the game as a late sub, flew into the legs of Canada’s Desiree Scott, knees first. Then she set up the game winner. All night, Alex Morgan had created scoring opportunities by dribbling through traffic and lofting balls toward Wambach, who missed a few easy opportunities. Morgan would finish the job herself, with the game-winning header off O’Reilly’s long cross. “Heading is something Pia [Sundhage, the U.S. coach,] has always said is one of my weakest points,” says Morgan. “Which is, you know, probably a true statement.”

After Morgan scored, says Wambach, “I told her in the dog pile after, ‘Alex, I love you. I think I’m in love with you in this moment. You just sent us to the gold-medal match.’” Rapinoe was similarly ecstatic. “It was one of those feelings, like, ‘Jesus Christ, we just scored.’” Morgan couldn’t contain her emotions. “I’ve never wanted to cry on the field after scoring a goal,” says Morgan. “I think I might have shed a tear. Then after the whistle blew, 30 seconds later, I went up to my family and hugged them, cried with them. They were all shaking, I was shaking, we couldn’t believe it.”

This team is gaining rock-star status. Dozens of fans lined up outside the stadium for autographs, as if the American women played for Man U. If the U.S. beats Japan on Thursday in the World Cup rematch, and wins its third straight Olympic gold, the team’s mainstream celebrity will rise. The U.S. has been itching for this matchup. “We’ve had nightmares about it even, what happened last summer,” says Wambach. “This is an opportunity for us, not even redemption, but to prove ourselves. To let whatever happened last summer go, and be in a position to go after and take the gold medal. Because we believe that we’ve earned it.”

US played their hearts out and got the outcome they deserved. The entire first half the refs were very pro-Canada, letting call after call go. Nobody took the game away from them. The call that was made is a standard call and it's especially necessary once the keeper's been warned that she's holding the ball too long. She says it was nothing official? What does she want? It's not like a police stop where they hand you a paper warning. They said something to her. She did it again after she was warned and they FINALLY awarded the indirect kick they could have awarded time and time before. The hand ball is what led to the PK, but guess what? All hand balls are unintentional and all of them in the box are PKs and almost all of those are goals. It's soccer. It's how the game works. The U.S. was the better team, both from what I saw and on the stat sheet.

Can you imagine the whining that would have erupted if that brutal call had gone against the USA? Never ever seen that call from 6 year old soccer right thru to World Cup. Just...brutal. Canada derserved MUCH better. Like, a gold medal.

The referee could've avoided all controversy and a possible sacking by doing what every other referee does: issue a yellow card. If that didn't work, then a follow-up up yellow card and subsequent ejection would've taken care of the issue--all without handing the U.S. side a solid scoring opportunity that completely changed the entire dynamic of the game.

No game this epic should ever have been tainted by an official's poor judgment. In a strange twist of irony, the controversy undoubtedly raised the profile of this game ever higher by forcing the game into extra minutes and making it all more newsworthy via the whole "cruel twist of fate" angle.

I realize that TIME is an American-run news source, but I thought that perhaps they would have more integrity and write an article from even a somewhat neutral point of view. Canadians are made out to be out-of-shape, whiners lacking skill while anyone who watched the game will have seen that was far from the case. I'm disappointed in the American players' tactless comments and even more disappointed in the author of this clearly biased article.

I grew up playing and watching football, basketball, and baseball. All the timeouts, commercials, and standing around are so boring. I discovered soccer as an adult. It is growing by leaps and bounds in popularity in this country. This drives all the haters crazy and they make ignorant comments such as Chris Ar's.

Lots of non calls all day long. I understand the disappointment and anger from Canadian fans, but your team had 30 minutes to score in OT. Woulda, coulda shoulda. Don't let your whining take away from how well your team played for 120 minutes.

The U.S. team play like thugs and think they are "all that". Well, Canada could have beaten them had it not been or terrible refereeing and calls. Also Solo's remarks were also very unsportsmanlike. Christine Sinclair is one of the best in the world. Maybe even better than Wambach. How many goals did Wambach get in the game. I know I will be rooting for Japan!

This is absolutely correct. The standard response is a yellow card. There is no precedent for awarding an indirect kick there. The subsequent penalty call was also a disaster. An elite level referee should never award a penalty on such an unclear play, particularly when it could change the outcome, particularly late in the game, and particularly when the stakes are extremely high. Absolutely shameful sequence of calls. And I'm a big USA soccer fan.

I can understand Canada's post-game reaction. It may not be the most professional reaction, but anyone who has played the game even recreationally will understand how those players felt.

Nothing is more tactless than the Canadian players' comments. They are essentially saying the ref fixed the game. I'm sorry, but they had 1 questionable foul called against them, and the US team had at least 2 pK's ignored. Bad officiating in this game went both ways.

While I do agree that the two calls were unfair, this article is far from biased. The language of this article is more neutral than not, "This rule is frequently violated, and almost never enforced.", "The U.S. players saw things differently", "The crowd hissed; afterwards, the Canadians were furious". These statements are clearly objective.

And before you ask , no, I wasn't rooting for US; on the contrary I was rooting for Canada.

Did you not read the rule? It's posted a few comments up. It's not a yellow card offense. She was warned prior to the start of the half that she'd been holding the ball too long. So finally, after doing it again, the right call was made for the indirect kick. Indirect. The hand ball is what put the goal in on the free kick. Hand balls are never intentional. Such is soccer.

It was far more than 1 questionable call!!! She created a rule! Not to mention the many many other calls that didn't get called. I think if far more tactless to ignore the reality and go on to the gold medal game believing you earned it.

There are a lot of things written in the FIFA rules that are absolutely never enforced. When I speak of precedent, I'm not talking about that. "Time wasting" is a yellow card no matter who does it. In the many (many.. many) high level professional matches I've watched I've never seen a single indirect awarded for the 6 second rule. I've seen many yellow cards given, goalkeepers included, for time wasting. That's what I mean when I say precedent.

There is a reason referees do it that way as well. If you call the 6 second rule, you have to call it consistently. So every time a keeper accidentally went over the mark, it's an indirect. That would be a farce. Time wasting, on the other hand, is only something that applies to the late game to a team who is happy with the current result. You can call that consistently without making the game ridiculous.

Whether that passage of the FIFA rules or that series of calls was more of a disaster is up to you to decide, but neither one should have had anything to do with that game.

An indirect free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a goalkeeper, inside his own penalty area, commits any of the following four offences:

- controls the ball with his hands for more than six seconds before releasing it from his possession

- touches the ball again with his hands after he has released it from his possession and before it has touched another player

- touches the ball with his hands after it has been deliberately kicked to him by a team-mate

- touches the ball with his hands after he has received it directly from a throw-in taken by a team-mate"

Two obvious observations from this:

1. FIFA should start using gender-neutral language in the Laws of the Game. Not every keeper is a "him".

2. The referee didn't create the rule. FIFA did. She applied it properly. McLeod was warned; the rules don't require it to be an "official" warning. That's just a bunch of whiner nonsense.

Check the rules before you complain about a call. I'll also concur with the judgement of many that the Canadians benefited from the ref as much as they were hurt by her. Tancredo should have been sent off with two yellows due to her repeated fouls. The ref called more than enough fouls, but never gave the card. There were multiple plays in each half where Canadian success hinged on

Tancredo's ability to foul with near impunity.

Whining about bad calls is part of the game, in my opinion. Suggesting that the fix was in, however, verges on bad sportsmanship. The Canadian team should be very, very proud of their performance. Don't sully it with bitterness and talk about how they "didn't really lose".